|
|
|
|
|
|
by gruez
289 days ago
|
|
|
This just feels like nitpicking over the exact numbers? At the end of the day, it's still cities/states representing some fraction of the country unilaterally deciding to override the immigration policies of the federal government. |
|
|
No. That's not it at all. While Federal law is the supreme law of the land, it is enforced by the Federal government.
The several states and any municipalities within them are under no obligation to enforce Federal laws, just as the Federal government is under no obligation to enforce state and local laws.
Which is why the Federal government often ties funding to legislation, using the carrot of funding (and the stick of pulling such funding if states do not) to compel states to cooperate with the Federal government.
What's more, the Federal courts (including SCOTUS) have repeatedly ruled that the states are not required to enforce Federal law for the Federal government.
And no one is "unilaterally deciding to override the immigration policies of the federal government." In fact, state and local law enforcement have repeatedly been used to back up Federal agents executing those immigration policies.
No Federal law requires a state to enforce Federal immigration policies. And not enforcing a law outside of a law enforcement agency's jurisdiction (again Federal law is the jurisdiction of Federal government not state/local governments) isn't "overriding" anything.
You appear to be confused about the law and how it works in the US and the several states. Here are a few links to help straighten you out:
https://www.cato.org/commentary/yes-states-can-nullify-some-...
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/521/898/
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/505/144/
https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/can-the-u.s.-government...